0 $
2,500 $
5,000 $
1,751 $

Syrian War Report – Dec. 14, 2018: Russian Forces Start Siege Of US Base In At-Tanf


Loading the player...

If you’re able, and if you like our content and approach, please support the project. Our work wouldn’t be possible without your help: PayPal: southfront@list.ru or via: http://southfront.org/donate/ or via: https://www.patreon.com/southfrontBTC: 3Gbs4rjcVUtQd8p3CiFUCxPLZwRqurezRZ, BCH: qpf2cphc5dkuclkqur7lhj2yuqq9pk3hmukle77vhq, ETH: 0x9f4cda013e354b8fc285bf4b9a60460cee7f7ea9

Russian forces have established several military positions near the US-controlled zone of at-Tanf, pro-government media activists reported on December 12.

A source familiar with the situation, told SouthFront that several air-defense systems and other military equipment were deployed at the Russian positions. More weapons, including heavy rocket launchers, are reportedly expected to arrive there in the upcoming few days.

The Saudi London-based newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat even claimed that Russia is going to deploy an S-300 system to the province of Deir Ezzor. However, this type of rumors is common for the Saudi outlet, which has been actively working to fuel tensions between the Syrian-Iranian-Russian alliance and the US-Israeli-led bloc as well as between Russia and Iran.

In early December, forces of the US-led coalition employed its M142 High Mobility Artillery Rocket System to fire several rockets at positions of the Syrian Arab Army (SAA) in the area of al-Ghurab Mount. The shelling caused no casualties but contributed to further growth of tensions in this part of Syria.

Late on December 13, the US-backed Syrian Democratic Forces made a fresh effort to capture the town of Hajin from ISIS. According to pro-SDF sources, the group is now in control of the town center and clashing with the terrorists in its southern part. Some sources even already speculated that Hajin is under full SDF control. However, this is yet to be happen.

A spokesman for the coalition of pro-Turkish militant groups branded as the Syrian National Army, Major Youssef Hamoud, told Reuters that up to 15,000 Turkish-backed militants will participate in the upcoming Turkish operation against the Kurdish militias – YPG/YPJ in northern Syria.

The statement came as the Turkish Armed Forces (TAF) deployed a few dozens of armoured vehicles in its provinces bordering the Syrian province of Aleppo.

Meanwhile, a Turkish soldier was killed in an attack of the YPG near the town of Tell Rifaat in northern Aleppo. The TAF responded to the attack by launching a series of powerful artillery strikes on YPG and SAA positions near the town.

It should be noted that earlier in 2018 a notable number of YPG members had fled from the Turkish advance on Afrin to the areas protected by the SAA near the city of Aleppo. Local sources say that YPG members may attempt to use SAA positions as a shield for their attacks on the TAF. In case of the success, this approach may cause open hostilities between the SAA and the TAF in the area.



Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • karakajeen

    ASSAD and PUTIN 📸 strategy warriors ⚔️ defending Mother land countries 🗡️ US ☠️ Genocide ☢️ Regime 🗡️ creating WARs 📣

  • Mistaron

    Considering John Bolton’s latest diatribe toward Russia and China, there is no chance that the Americans will withdraw from Syria, regardless of whether ISIS is defeated or not. Unfortunately, I fear the confrontations will only increase with an outcome no one wants except for the Neocons, ZioIsrael and a US-dependent Saud, which seems to have Trump’s unequivocal full support.
    Pray Putin knows what he’s doing.

    • jorge

      Well, I didn’t knew that the general staff in Russia was called Putin, by the way, I imagine that neither the chinese general staff nor the russian general staff would give a dam to what Bolton says.

      • You can call me Al

        Is Trump the Commander in Chief of the US armed forces >, YES – of course you know deep down.

        • FlorianGeyer

          But who controls Trump ?
          Its not his wife. :)

          • John Wallace

            Probably the same one that had Obama’s ear firmly clenched between his teeth.

          • Jens Holm

            The Constitution controls Trump as well as protect. They can resign him too.

          • John Wallace

            But we are talking of the puppeteer not the puppets Jens. The unseen power from behind the throne that answers to no one but themselves.

            Anyway Caroline Wozniacki is coming back to visit us again just after new year. She loves it here and we love having her. She is a really lovely person.

          • You can call me Al

            Probably that swine who allegedly is his Son in Law.

        • Muhammad Abbass

          The Pentagon has repeatedly refused his orders so we know the answer to that actually. Trump is learning quickly on the job. Do as you are told and you’ll get to die of old age.

        • Jens Holm

          There are big limitations of that,.

          McCain and the warcomiity is one. Another is the US forces are much more independent in USA then in other countries. And third USA are in systems with others and not only Nato.

          Deep down very much is a relative too.

    • Ronald

      Putin is the only one who knows what he’s doing, the dogs of war, will loose.

  • stary ujo

    There are need 5 Kaliber rockets and destroy rats nest JUESEJ !

  • Fred Summers

    Lets be clear – this is NOT a seige. The US ‘base’ and its security zone covers 3 countries! – Syria, Iraq, and Jordan.

    If the base was to be laid seige to it would need to encircled on the land and also blocked from the air – neither of which has occured.

    This is actually a ‘line in the sand’ being drawn by the Syria Government, enforced by Russian muscle.

    Both Syria and Russia are very concerned that the a US AIRBASE is being constructed alonside the base and current airfield – and that it will be seriously upgraded to fly in all sorts of interesting equipment and personnel.

    There is already a concern that heavy equipment and air defence equipment from Iraq will be brought up, and new supply lines through Jordan will be created / further developed which will allow the US to move deep into Syrian territory and conduct opperations to set up more ‘bases’ and eventually begin to carve a wedge out of Syria.

    This ‘wedge’ and the US facilities within it will of course prove irresistable to Israel. They can safely move equipment to Jordan which can then be ‘leap frogged’ to the US bases when required.

    These moves are simply being ‘checked’ by the SAA backed by Russian firepower (protected by Russian forces).

    For the Russians and Syrians this is a long overdue ‘this far and no further’ opperation. However, stopping the US from further encroachment into Syrian territory is one thing, getting them to leave is quite another. It is very unlikely they will choose to leave and there is no realistic military option other than by proxy (a proven US tactic).

    The US (and the Israelis) were clearly preparing for the long game of occupation and slow creeping growth and expansion, so they are now being played at their own game by the SAA and Russia.

    That US base will be very, very costly to maintain long term, and further development of it as a major airbase has now been slowed down if not yet, thwarted (as it is obviously under the cover of Russian air defence systems). Economics as opposed to military issues will likely decide how long that base stays open – but it is going nowhere for the short term, possibly even the medium term.

    • Joe

      Only silly people think US can stay in Syria when Assad has got rid of the terrorists.
      Time is no there yet for Assad to tell the Americans to leave.

      Fact is if Russia backs up Assad, US stand no chance even against Hez alone.
      not to say SAA and Iranians …

      Only morons think they can carve up Syria like that.

      • Fred Summers

        I am neither a silly person nor a pro-US sheep. I simply look at facts on the ground and historical evidence to predict future behavior.

        The US will occupy that region for as long as people keep accepting the Dollar.

        Last time I checked, the US were still occupying Afghanistan, still occupying Iraq, and still had ‘boots on the ground’ in just about every major nation except Iran, Russia, and China.

        Heck, the US never stopped occupying JAPAN and GERMANY even after WW2 was won! Who would have thought that over 70 years after WW2 the US would still be occupying Germany under the guise of NATO, and Japan?

        Yes, they may dress us thier occupations as ‘peacekeeping’ or ‘fighting terror’, or ‘regional security’, or keeping Europe free of the Communists (reason for occupying Germany), but they never leave voluntarily.

        They are still in Korea more than half a century after that ended too, creating new excuses to stay by poking both North Korea and China.

        The US have a toe hold in Syria, and they want to put an airbase there to turn it into a foothold. If they do, that airbase will straddle 3 countries – Syria, Iraq, and Jordan, and put the US in a very strong position to decide what happens to Syria in the future.

        As much as it pains me to see, the likelyhood of Syria being carved up, especially if Turkey take more ground, is more than 50% probable at this time.

        • Alan Foo

          Come on, US occupying those countries? Silly. They are allies.

          In Alfganistan? US is not winning but losing.

          Want to stay in Syria? Fat dreams.

          Tell me what forces US had INSIDE SYRIA that can defeat even HEZbollah not to say SAA ?

          Once Terrorists have been taken care of, with Russian support US is no match for Assad forces .

          The only thing is US are bad losers and will use excessive air power to destroy but can never defeat SAS so long as iran is there not to say Russia.

          Fanciful thinking want to carve up Syria. It will never happen

          • Muhammad Abbass

            The only reason the yanks are still there, is because Russia is using influence with Iran not to remove them. Iran is not afraid of the USA, there have been numerous incidents in Syria and Iraq though not well publicised which show this. Iran is however a careful and diplomatic player. They like Russia would prefer to outsmart the USA than out fight them. It isn’t that hard to outsmart junk yard dogs really. However fighting them will always be messy.

          • Jens Holm

            Again totally madness of the worst kind.

          • Jens Holm

            The world dont look like that anolog, You try to show as real. Its real for You only.

        • jorge

          That’s your opinion about the probable, or your probable. Another probable is that the SAA will fight all the militias that don’t want a political settlement, with an russian umbrella. In this ‘probable’, the SAA will fight those militias, retaking the rest of their country, while their umbrella take care of the militias umbrellas.

          • beypuutyina

            saa is weak.

          • Vectormanic

            Weak yes, yet they have a big, interested friend who has provided the difference.

          • Muhammad Abbass

            Weak? Who could have withstood the forces arrayed against them without such a friend? Maybe you should don some boots, grab a rifle and an Uncle Sam pay check and go see how weak the SAA is? Everything is relative and the SAA is pound for pound now one of the best fighting forces in the Middle East. Hezbollah and Iran clearly hold the title. “Israel” is a gang of hopeless amateurs and the rest of those Arab nasty states have militaries worth next to nothing. Turkey is strong, but cannot outmatch the SAA on their own territory either. Everything is relative and the USA spends by far the most on their military only to end up with a fairly incompetent and unsuccessful model as it turns out.

          • Jens Holm

            You really make me cry and laugh. And weight or what. The Syrian pound is wirth 10 grammes of rust.

          • Gregory Casey

            Has what is left of your brain completely melted Jens? You’re making no sense at all ……… even less than usual and that’s saying something!

          • Vectormanic

            You misunderstood me… Weak only when compared to Russia, America and Israel. I respect the army of Syria and happen to like Bashar’s personal authenticity, but you have to admit that Russian air support quickly stopped and then reversed the adversary forces everywhere at once.

            Syrian forces are fighting within their own boundaries and that always is what’s called home field advantage in the West.

          • Muhammad Abbass

            SAA has done the main ground work, ‘boots on the ground’ of the historical resistance to the aggression of the most powerful and wealthy players in world politics. The same gang of cutthroats and pirates which has rooted every other decent nationalistic state, destroyed their society and pillaged their national resources has been singularly unsuccessful in Syria. For the first time. Yes Russian muscle has served to counterbalance the greatest military on earth and a few close also-rans but how on God’s earth could Syria have withstood the combined military might (however ‘concealed’ and hidden behind proxies) of the USA, UK, Saudi Arabia, “Israel”, Turkey etc etc (Australia) etc France…. All these stinking hypocrite countries have been exporting weapons and extremists to Syria in a bid to screw the country and ruin Assad. So Russia has taken the edge off with their extraordinary air force and technology and excellent servicemen in small numbers but make no mistake little man, the SAA has kicked the arses of the gang of miscreants made up by the USA and allies. Iran has also run rings around you all. Losers, who can only keep it up by spending the futures of their citizens away on wasted wars for a dying US dollar and the resultant hegemony.

          • Jens Holm

            Whatever. SAA are as weak as ever. So many soldiers are home and cant fight anymore. So many are dead as spendables.

            Many save money having only one foot. Not all is bad.

          • Alan Foo

            That’s your opinion. Another article I read Syrian forces are about the strongest in the tegion being battle hardened compared to lame US and or Israeli soldiers who gave not seen real battle in their lives.
            Be informed, the next battle will be fought in Israel when Assad had got rid of the terrorists. That’s bwht Israel is so panicky and uses the ONLY weapon they have air power proven to be useless.

            Try to prove me wrong before

          • Alan Foo

            Silly .. SAS has achieved the impossible. They withstood the entire western might with air cover assistance from Russia plus advisers from Iran with Hez.

            That’s about the greatest achievement for a small cpincou.

            They will be immortalised to have achieved the IMPOSSIBLE.

          • Jens Holm

            Its not about oppinions. You know nothing.

            2 days ago I even heard some of Your kind think Assads with Iran, Hesbollah and Russia should attack Israel and would win.

            Same things about that: Its not even an option and secondly even I will not let Israel die as western and Nato, how indame those israelians are.

            It also confirm You in my mind insist in being lower in most in the world by not being able to learn.

        • Muhammad Abbass

          Yes overall correct. Just don’t forget the dollar has entered its final days. It has been under direct threat since Saddam Hussein, and now things have gone much further and those nations doing what Saddam threatened, are out of US reach and increasingly creating their own alternatives to everything related to the US dollar. The world is quickly looking to the light they are creating and now more than 3/4 of the world’s actual people are part of an alternative system which is specifically designed to replace the US dollar. The only thing keeping the US dollar in it’s many decades long position as a reserve currency is oil and the bloated US military which acts as the muscle to sort anybody daring to challenge US hegemony. Well as of the last few years, that horse has bolted. Even close, long term US allies are stepping away from Uncle Sam’s crooked table and buying chips with the opposition. The USA is a dying leviathan which will hurt a lot of others going down but which everyone knows has to go down for any life to go on. The USA’s time is up. You had your chance, you went the way of all previous empires when once they’d lost they way and become infiltrated by the usual suspects. They’ve sucked it dry now they’ll toss the empty husk aside and move onto the next host. I believe they’re refurbishing their little corner in China, and their new base will be there. We in the West, are yesterday’s news.

          • Jens Holm

            Almost blasfemi to compare anything Damaskus with dollars.

            They hardly has pictures of them. You have no relations outside the indoctrinated given to as food for sheep and goats een from before, You were born.

            The same goes for so many here. You are told and told totally lies of the woirst kind and by that cant compare with, how we are in the rest of the world. Even the Russian is twisted like learning about USSR.

            Turks by tha way are same thing. When we se Erdogan on Turkish TV after being outside Turkey, we not even recognoze, what he has talked about with our politicians.

          • Gregory Casey

            It is quite clear you have neither understanding nor knowledge of the nature of civil society in Syria pre-War Jens. Time for you to catch up on your studies. Syria has probably the best-educated population in the Middle-East and it is that educated populace that will enable Syria to rebuild as a Country and as a society post-war with a health service capable of providing free healthcare for all Syrians at a level just as good as in any western Country. Moreover, in years to come, children in schools in the West will be taught that Syria and Syrians were what stopped and brought an end to the wahhabi-salafist Saudi cut-throat financial empire stretching from the Horn of Africa to Jordan and lapping up against the shores of the Sea of Galilee. All gone!

        • John Whitehot

          “|and put the US in a very strong position to decide what happens to Syria in the future.”

          This is objectable.
          The US created this “foothold” for the only reason it was NOT able to decide what happened in Syria – in fact for the first time the regime-changing, nwo globalist agenda has been stopped and defeated.

          The idea the US gives out today, is to not being able to predict what will happen (owed in large part to the impossibility of its “leadership” to accept that they have been outwitted completely).

          It’s almost like saying – “we stay there just in case, who know what the future hold?”, stubbornly refusing to understand that adult countries already know “what the future holds”, and that everything the US does short of getting out has the only effect of making things harder for the victims of this war of aggression.

      • Muhammad Abbass

        Whilst I agree with your conclusion (implied) that Russia, Hezbollah, Iran and Syria could stymy any plans of the usual suspects I don’t think there’s any reason to presume the Americans and their hapless allies will see it so until the first angry shots are fired. I don’t think there’s much to stop the usual suspects blundering ahead (plundering?) anyway and doing what they always do. — When a plan fails, double down and double down again. — I just don’t think the Russian assistance in Syria, whilst it has been crucial and courageous all the way, amounts to the sort of roadblock to ambitions of world domination as it is practised in Washington, London and Tel Aviv. (The same tribe but it has a few bases of operations) Russia is holding the fort so to speak, but not deterring the hordes from their present course of aggression.
        So yes the faithful Christian Orthodox and Shia Muslim front which is the essence of what I’m talking about, has what it takes to take these devils out, but they have not, assuming they even could, managed to deter the crazies from giving it their best (worst?) shot anyway.
        I’ll be seriously surprised if things don’t get very interesting and unpleasant in Syria in the coming year. Never forgetting a prophecy I read in the 80s which said WWIII would start in Syria. I doubt it will be that bad, but either the usual suspects get to steal victory from the jaws of defeat by sheer intimidation or they are going to have to be confronted and hard in the coming year.

        • Jens Holm

          There is nothing to plunder in Syria at all. Mainpart of the oil even is Sulphur and asphalt infected.

      • Jens Holm

        We are many silly people.

        USA can do anything they want there – almost.

        So its a matter of reasons and not some russian military museum having too many low tech, low educated soldiers raised in the spirit of Hafez, which make it.

        Its about why USA and others are there. That hasnt changed apart from it now is a great succes. The damaskus Syria hardly exist. 12 millions are not at home. More then 500.000 is dead. All oil sold for the next 25 years for russia, areas permanent in not in Damaskus control.

        The only making Damaskus stronger might be some goldmedals at the next many para-olympics.

        • Joe

          Silly uneducated post indeed.

          Syria a small country, yes devastated by your kind and you are still prasing such monsters who love to see deaths .

          What has Syrian done wrong other than trying to maybe to get back the Golan stolen by your friend and have the gall to ask others to recognise that stolen land EVEN though Israel has no way to keep it when Syria is done with Terrorists.

          Fact is Syrians have been the greatest fighters to neutralise the entire Nato (USA included ) all those Sunni Arab countries plus all the sanctions from Europe to USA for saving Europe from Terrorists ..etc.

          Get a life my friend .. see who are the sick people.

          Yet Assad stands tall …and all those who said Assad must go…have mostly gone. He is still there with head high .

        • Joe

          Another , you and your insinuation of low quality Russian weaponry ….

          Why has Israel not dare to enter Syria today and have to BEG Russia NOT TO SHOOT DOWN THEIR PLANES.. if Israel or American planes are so powerful?

          Hey answer before you respond and try to avoid this question as you always do in my past posts.

          In fact Russia is tooooo eager to shoot down the F35 and then the entire F35 program will go to the dogs. Just watch . That is why at EXACT TIMING , F35s reported grounded to have this and that problem to give Israel an excuse NOT to use F35 to destroy the S300 after all the bravado claims.

          Assad is waiting to score the biggest victory.. .downing of an F35 .

    • Muhammad Abbass

      That’s the plan, but the planners are relying on outdated thinking and they are up against a few very old and wise players in the form of Russia, Syria and Iran. I think these parties despite being weaker in direct terms remain the serious tacticians and they hold the best hand going forward. However this garbage in Syria is far from over, it could easily drag out another 6 years if the yanks remain stubborn to the end and the Russians refuse to hit them hard enough to make them think twice.

    • RichardD

      You’re overstating the US Al-Tanf operation. There are only about 2,000 US troops of various flavors in all of Syria. They’re spread very thin.

      From the looks of it, there’s a few hundred in Al-Tanf at most. That’s unlikely to increase substantially. It’s a holding operation at best, or a managed retreat depending on how you want to look at it.

      It has little military significance. It’s simply blocking a trade route as an act of economic warfare. The US when pressed is likely to withdraw rather than contest it. Now that their pet terrorist desert rats that they’ve been supporting for years have been rolled up.

  • John Whitehot

    a siege indicates a situation where the defenders are cut off by the besiegers and possibly terrain.

    this does not apply here as the US base is supplied from at least a route coming from outside Syria.

    the current situation in the area more likely rensembles one of containment and direct observation of possible advances of US supported terrorist away from the tanf garrison.

    more caution should be exercised in using technical words, otherwise go write for british tabloids.

    • FlorianGeyer

      The UK Daily Telegraph is also ‘ challenged ‘ with the meaning of words John.

      Doubtless from semi-literacy as well as the intent to deceive or aggrandise.

      Words are increasingly being replaced by pictures in many aspects of our lives. We are returning to the Neanderthal period in many ways I think. :)

      • Jens Holm

        I see no siege at all. Putting a kind of line there is good for blocking ISIS leftovers as well as few from FSA.

        Fine with me, but no Siege.

        Al transportation to Tanf are from Jordan and Iraq and maybee inside the neutral zones.

      • LOL

    • AmericanKim

      US supported terrorist???…really?

      • John Wallace

        Yes … really ..

      • Hillarys MOBS or Trump JOBS

        MCShame and the CIA

      • John Wallace

        The Americans at Al Tanf are not the same as the ones with the YPG / SDF in eastern/ northern Syria. There is an odorous stench of CIA Black ops emanating from there.

      • FlorianGeyer

        Really, YES.

      • Muhammad Abbass

        Yes really.

      • Jens Holm

        You are hindu and family to Rudyard Kipling.

    • John Wallace

      I think Al Tanf straddles the main Damascus – Baghdad highway just north of the Iraq border with the Jordanian border just to the west of Iraq so no way any siege will be enforced . Just another wrong usage of words by a English as a second language user.

    • RichardD

      My understanding of the English language. And unlike people in the UK, I speak by far the largest dialect of it, North American English. Would be that the qualifying phrase of start defines the use of the word siege to accurately describe what is happening. A deployment is being made to begin the process of encircling the area:

      “the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.”

      – Siege –


      • John Whitehot

        “the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies”

        To attain that, the condition is cutting off the main route coming from Jordan to the Tanf area.

        In these conditions the US would either:

        Stand and fight to prevent the above from happening OR

        Retreat through that route.

        No siege of the area is currently happening, or in the process to happen.

        To be considered in the process to happen, the Syrian/Russian forces would have to attack the flanks of the area to reach the route, which is currently untrue.

        • RichardD

          The start is once they begin the process of surrounding the area. Which it’s pretty clear that they’ve begun by moving heavy siege weapons into place. If these reports are true, given their history, the Syrian government coalition will continue the process down to the Jordanian and Iraqi borders and then moving along the border in a pincer action to complete the encirculment. And start sectioning off the cordoned area piece by piece.

          Leaving an escape route open from areas under siege is a common tactic of the SAA in recovery actions, and in all likelyhood will be used in this operation as well. They’ve been running probing actions for a while now. But air defense systems and multiple rocket launchers are a clear indincation that the process of placing Al-Tanf under siege has begun.

          • John Whitehot

            “Which it’s pretty clear that they’ve begun by moving heavy siege weapons into place”

            like what? catapults?

            “The start is once they begin the process of surrounding the area. ”

            They did not start surrounding the area as they approach from one direction only until the back of the area is clear, there is no “siege”.

            “Leaving an escape route open from areas under siege is a common tactic of the SAA in recovery actions, ”

            Areas are not under siege if there are escape routes out of them, period.

            of course i’m 100% positive that nothing in this universe is going to convince you so let’s put it like this – only SF and you are positively convinced that the area may be under siege.

            There is certainly the chance that some other individual with a faked identity will join the chorus – at that point it would be me and the rest of the world on one side vs SF, you and that individual on the other.

            hope this is clear enough and there’s no need to add anything.

          • RichardD

            “the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.”

            – Siege –


            I don’t think that there’s anything wrong with my grasp of the English language.

            “a series of actions or steps taken in order to achieve a particular end.

            – process-


            I pointed out that moving modern heavy siege weapons like air defense systems and multiple rocket launchers into place is part of the start of laying a siege. And you responded with facetious sarcasm about catapults. Which indicates that you’re not interested in a rational debate of dictionary definitions of the English language. If you want to behave in that type of immature and irrational manner. It’s your life and reputation.

            SF’s use of the language as defined by dictionary meanings of the words involved is fully compliant with the construct of the language. If people are unaware of, or want to object to dictionary definitions and the rules of grammar. They can educate themselves or complain to the language instructors or publishers.

          • John Whitehot

            “Which indicates that you’re not interested in a rational debate of dictionary definitions of the English language”

            Absolutely correct :D

          • RichardD

            Being irrational and unreasonable is your choice. And it’s your reputation that will suffer from it.

          • John Whitehot

            i’m not looking for credibility.

            rationality is self-contained in my comments, and whoever wants to challenge it can come forward with any point.

            what i won’t discuss is semantics, especially with people that aren’t free to objectively ponder the considerations in a given argument.

            I’ve always had great respect for you and your posts (opposed to some users for which I have little or no respect at all), sometimes I don’t agree with you and reply accordingly – there is nothing bad at disagreeing.

            I hope you are old and confident enough to not lose respect for another poster because you can’t convince him on something.

            This particular subject is expired long ago imo. You want to go with SF version of the word “siege”, but know that historically, its sense has always been something entirely different than this usage (as reflected perfectly in your posts).

            Adding vulgarity and prejudice to already difficult themes like military ones is an odious practice, one that has costed dearly to humanity in all its history, and one i want to avoid at all costs.

          • RichardD

            What you’re ignoring in your effort to accuse SF of tabloid grade journalism. Is that they clearly state:


            The operative word here is start. I agree that if true, moving heavy siege weapons into place on an encircled area is the beginning of a siege.

            Not all sieges are the same, the nature of the siege is defined by it’s location and objectives. A siege of a border position where the attacking force doesn’t have access to one side of the border is different from a siege where a border isn’t a factor.

            “the act of surrounding a place by an armed force in order to defeat those defending it”

            – siege –


            “the act or process of surrounding and attacking a fortified place in such a way as to isolate it from help and supplies, for the purpose of lessening the resistance of the defenders and thereby making capture possible.”

            – siege –


            As far as historical context. Observers in a fort or castle next to a border who are surrounded on three fronts and see heavy siege weapons placed in the location where they can be used against their position would likely agree that it’s the start of a siege, not the middle of a siege where they’re being shot at. Or the end of a siege where they’re killed, surrender, or withdraw through a provided corridor and turn over the location to the attacker. In this case what’s under siege is the location, not the occupants. The Syrian government coalition’s objective isn’t in arrests or casualties, it’s not that type of siege, it’s territory recovery.

            The history of the Syrian government coalition is that they start a siege by surrounding the area and placing heavy siege weapons where they’l be used to attack the target, close most or all of the escape routes in a pincer action, and partition the area until it’s fully recovered.

            The Al-Tanf area with the exception of the border is already 100% surrounded. And the Iraq and Jordan sides of the border are inaccessible to the Syrian government coalition. Placing siege weapons where they’l be used in conjunction with the encirclement to close most supply routes signals the start of the siege. A siege by definition is compelling the occupants to surrender. It doesn’t require that the occupants be attacked or completely cut off from supplies. In many sieges most of the time there is no weapons use beyond their deployment much of the time, and some supplies are allowed in. Denial of humanitarian supplies is a war crime.

            The only component of a siege that isn’t complete is the encirclement to deny military supplies. And not all sieges of necessity contain that component if it isn’t material to the objective.

            A surrounded citadel on a river is a similar situation. Where one side of the river with the exception of the citadel and adjacent river bank is controlled by the opposing force, and the river and other side of the river is controlled by a friendly force.

            The objective of a siege isn’t the cutting off of supplies, the objective is forcing the surrender of the occupiers to either capture or kill them or the surrender of the location to obtain control of the position. Surrounding and being able to attack or attacking the position to obtain control of it fulfills the criteria of a siege if that is it’s objective, as it is in this case, supply denial isn’t necessary to achieve the objective unless resupply and reinforcements are preventing the achievement of the objective. Which in this case is a non issue up to this point.

            There are enough elements of a siege in place in this case, considering the location and objectives, to realistically say that it’s started. If completing a pincer action to block the remaining supply route is necessary, that’s what will be done. It may not be necessary.

            If it was earlier in the war before the drive to Dier Ezzor, and the weapons were placed there as part of that advance, and Al-Tanf wasn’t completely surrounded to the border. Then I would agree that the weapons placement doesn’t signify the start of a siege. And would just be part of the advance. But with Al-Tanf surrounded to the border on all sides. Placing that type of equipment there for the purpose of recovering the position, does in fact signify the start of a siege.

  • NobodysaysBOO

    YEP they have us SURROUNDED, be very very SCARED!!!!
    of lying JEWS!!!!


    • John Wallace

      Well Iran will just have to shrink its borders before they encroach onto those bases. What were they thinking expanding like that.. Oh that American flag just to left of the A of Afghanistan can be removed . That whole area was handed over to full control of the Taliban the other day.

      • Muhammad Abbass

        Indeed and those are just bases, for the most part isolated and amidst Taliban controlled areas. The yanks control every one of their more than 800 bases world wide. Every square meter. Not much beyond that though as we are increasingly seeing.

  • Maurizio Pucci

    Russian stalking of At-Tanf is so blyatiful :-)

    • Tudor Miron

      Interesting phraseologism.

  • kevin shannon

    Just bring our troops home and put them on our border. Let the rest of the world take care of itself. Have the strongest Navy in the world and completely destroy any nation that attacks us. Mind out own business. Stop all foreign aid. We are the largest debtor nation in the world. Stop all trade with communist china and Russia. Open up all our enegy resources and let the middle east drink their oil. Tell the Muslim world that if they attack us we will immediately drop a small nuclear weapon on Mecca.

    • Aen RaBeon

      Wake up man. The house of Rothschild owns you. You have no say in how to run USA.

      • Willing Conscience (The Truths

        They wouldn’t be owned by anyone if the US did what he was suggesting. They might even regain the status they once held long ago, a nation to be admired and emulated for all the right reasons.

        • potcracker2588

          first and foremost, the USA have to get rid of their COFFIN…..


          • Willing Conscience (The Truths

            Yes and so does every other country that has one that’s not government owned.

        • Aen RaBeon

          Yeah man I really hope so too, for the sake of world peace but that will remain as only an aspiration. The Rulers made sure that americans are preoccupied with work work and work so they can afford to pay more taxes which will then be given to tel aviv. You guys need an ‘American Spring ‘ badly. Good luck.

        • Gregory Casey

          Subject always to ensuring that all Neocons are jailed or lobotomized and the bankers of Wall Street and the Fed burned alive! Then, we might have peace.

      • potcracker2588

        but sad to say……. SPOT ON…….

      • Jens Holm

        arap music rap rap

    • potcracker2588

      smart man…..that is the so called Monroe Doctrine, which was passed on by Thomas Jefferson.

      President Thomas Jefferson extended Washington’s ideas about foreign policy in his March 4, 1801 inaugural address.
      Jefferson said that one of the “essential principles of our government”
      is that of “peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations,
      entangling alliances with none.”[5]

      In 1823, President James Monroe articulated what would come to be known as the Monroe Doctrine,
      which some have interpreted as non-interventionist in intent: “In the
      wars of the European powers, in matters relating to themselves, we have
      never taken part, nor does it comport with our policy, so to do. It is
      only when our rights are invaded, or seriously menaced that we resent
      injuries, or make preparations for our defense.”

    • Jens Holm

      The world WAS like that. Even so You participated in WW1 as well as WW2.

    • Gregory Casey

      Perfect Kevin but subject to the Banks and Financial sphere keeping the hell away and at home. Maybe, even, Americans might also dismantle Wall Street and all who control it together with the Fed!!

  • Willing Conscience (The Truths

    “Russian forces have established several military positions near the US-controlled zone of at-Tanf, pro-government media activists reported on December 12.
    A source familiar with the situation, told SouthFront that several air-defense systems and other military equipment were deployed at the Russian positions. More weapons, including heavy rocket launchers, are reportedly expected to arrive there in the upcoming few days.”

    Does this mean 2 artillery bases, God I hope it does.

    • Jens Holm

      It was told about a year ago. I would say, they have had big problems making it possible. Not only ISIS was/are there.

      The mainpronlem is supply and Russian military helicopters are made for another climate as well as some are not good enough.

      If You support Assads, its a good idea to have a base there. In the same moment I think its strange they dont re-use Palmyra.

      • Willing Conscience (The Truths

        I think it may have more to do with the two S-300 systems, no US jets will try to take out this base or any others near it now they have S-300’s protecting them.
        Palmyra isn’t close enough to use the artillery from, they have about 55 km range so they have to be no more than 10 to 15 km away from the exclusion zone to be effective. The first one is about 15 to 20 km away from the edge of the exclusion zone, which means it can hit targets 35 to 40 km inside the exclusion zone, two more of these bases and nothing could move inside the exclusion zone safely. The one problem they have is they can’t hit what they can’t see, and even from the edge of the exclusion zone they won’t be able to see that far, and they can’t get any closer than they already are or the US artillery will just do the same thing to them.

  • R Trojson

    Assad and Putin are suffering from Trump derangement syndrome. Obviously Trump needs the SAA to attack US troops. Then Trump has full license to take out Assad and anything else in Syria. As far as Assad building bases outside the 55km zone, we should all encourage it. Currently Russia-Assad-Iran claims that territory under their control is infested with ISIS terrorists. How ISIS terrorists can travel freely through that open terrain without the all seeing Russian military technology reporting it is a miracle requiring direct intervention by Allah.

    Thank Heaven US coalition has taken Hajin and is slowly advancing south killing every ISIS terrorists in their way. If Russian coalition only had the balls to fight al Safa ISIS instead of resupplying them and letting them go. Now we are to believe that same Russian coalition has the balls to attack US Troops? Remember last February when a battalion from the Russian coalition went up against US troops at an oil field and 300 Russian “mercenaries” went home in bags… what was left of them. The rest ran for their lives.

    • Brother Ma

      Americans only kill their pals and employees -ISIS- by accident ,Russia and its allies kill them by design ….God Bless them.

      • R Trojson

        When exactly will Russia start killing ISIS. They managed to surround al Safa ISIS for almost a year but in the end Russia resupplied al Safa ISIS and the let them go. Russia coalition has not even attacked ISIS in SW Euphrates yet. ISIS there controls 10% of what is left of Syria.

        • Brother Ma

          Even if what you say is true the Russian Syrian Iranian allies have killed more Isis than America has. The number of bombing runs or killings by Americanosizers is laughable. Obviously ,a hesitant token effort to pretend they are doing something against their pals.

  • Robert Cole

    John Whitehot, I think the heading says START SIEGE but not LAID SIEGE.

  • John

    I am not reading the ‘increased attention’ on Al-tanf by Russia as an isolated movement. It is a step, a part of the mechanism, to remove the US from Syria. Russia and Co. will make conditions untenable to remain there. There is no pressure on the Russian side.

    They can lay down difficulties for the US, one after another, a their leisure. For reference, look at what a couple of Russian aircraft showing up in Venezuela has done to the US position in Central and South America. It has destabilized all of US efforts, done at considerable investment of time and resources. That alone, puts incredible pressure on the US, to maintain anything, anywhere.

    As Russia has started to close the noose on the Coalition in Syria and Iraq, it will be a real live nightmare for them to stay there. Other stuff, like Venezuela and Qatar intending to leave OPEC, will be way to much for the US to cope with, as it has been incredibly overextened for way too long. This is the phase we have all been waiting to see, the end game. Those ladies and gentlemen in Washington D.C. are nowhere near prepared or capable of countering this. Now we will see who the real clowns are. My take, I wish well to all.

  • RichardD
  • RichardD

    Clearing US ground forces out of Al-Tanf looks like a precursor for doing the same thing east of the river.